DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Status of Claims
Claims 1-15 as filed on 04/18/2025 are pending and herewith considered as indicated below.
Drawings
The drawings are objected to under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore, the elements disclosed below must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Vapor Barrier (Claims 6 and 14, line 2, respectively)
First Plurality of Fasteners (Claim 8, Line 2)
Second Plurality of Fasteners (Claims 8, Line 2-3 and Claim 9, Lines 4-5)
Third Plurality of Fasteners (Claim 9, Lines 2 and 4)
At Least One Air Conduit (Claim 10, Line 2)
A space (Claim 10, Line 4)
A Suction Mechanism (Claim 10, Line 5 and Claim 11, Lines 1-2)
Wind Driven Rotatable Turbine (Claim 11, Line 2)
Wind Operated Venturi (Claim 11, Line 2)
Powered Air Moving Device (Claim 11, Lines 2-3)
First Low Wind Load Area (Claim 12, Lines 2 and 5-6 and Claim 15, Lines 1 and 5)
Second High Wind Load Area (Claim 12, Lines 3-4 and Claim 15, Line 3)
Fig. 1-2 are objected to because they include photographs and/or shading. Photographs, including photocopies of photographs, are not ordinarily permitted in utility and design patent applications unless the photographs are the only practicable medium for illustrating the claimed invention. The use of shading may be used if it aids in understanding the invention and if it does not reduce legibility. Such shading is preferred in the case of parts shown in perspective, but NOT for cross sections. See MPEP § 608.02. In the instant case, legibility is reduced.
Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-15 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
In regards to Claims 1-5 and 13, “each roof panel” as used throughout lacks proper antecedent basis. It appears “each roof panel” is intended to recite “the plurality of roof panels”
In regards to Claim 2, “their” as used in line 2 is unclear. Numerous elements have been previously introduced, and it is unclear which element is referenced with the use of the phrase “their”. It appears “their” is intended to recite “along the longitudinal edges”.
The term “air- and vapor-tight connection” in Claim 3, Line 3 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “air- and vapor-tight connection” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It appears air- and vapor-tight connection is intended to recite “ensuring a connection where no air and vapor enters between the plurality of roof panels” .
In regards to Claim 3, “mated roof panels” as used in lines 3-4, lacks proper antecedent basis. It appears “mated roof panels” is intended to recite “the plurality of roof panels”.
In regards to Claim 8, “the adjacent roof panels” as recited in line 2, lacks proper antecedent basis. It appears, “the adjacent roof panels” is intended to recite “the plurality of roof panels”.
In regards to Claim 9, “the longitudinal edges” as recited in line 2, lack proper antecedent basis. It appears “the longitudinal edges” are intended to recite “longitudinal edges”.
In regards to Claim 10, “the lower major surface” as recited in lines 2-3, lack proper antecedent basis. It appears “the lower major surface” are intended to recite “a lower major surface”.
The term “first low wind load area” in Claim 12, line 2 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “first low wind load area” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It appears the first low wind load area is intended to recite an area wherein the membrane is unsecured to the plurality of roof panels.
The term “the second high wind load area” in Claim 12, lines 3-4 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “the second high wind load area” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It appears the second high wind load area is intended to recite an area wherein the membrane is mechanically or adhesively adhered to the plurality of roof panels.
The term “loose laid” in claim 12, line 3 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “loose laid” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It appears loose laid is intended to recite unsecured.
In regards to Claim 13, “a roof framework” as recited in line 2, lacks proper antecedent basis. Due to the language of the claims and its dependency on independent claim 1, “a roof framework” has been previously introduced. It appears both instances of the phrase “a roof frame” is intended to recite to the same roof framework. It appears “a roof framework” is intended to recite “the roof framework”.
In regards to Claim 13, “a plurality of roof panels ” as recited in line 3, lacks proper antecedent basis. Due to the language of the claims and its dependency on independent claim 1, “a plurality of roof panels ” has been previously introduced. It appears both instances of the phrase “a plurality of roof panels ” is intended to recite to the plurality of roof panels. It appears “a plurality of roof panels ” is intended to recite “the plurality of roof panels ”.
In regards to Claim 13, “a roofing membrane” as recited in line 4, lacks proper antecedent basis. Due to the language of the claims and its dependency on independent claim 1, “a roofing membrane” has been previously introduced. It appears both instances of the phrase “a roofing membrane” is intended to recite to the roofing membrane. It appears “a roofing membrane” intended to recite “the roofing membrane”.
In regards to Claim 13, “at least one vent” as recited in line 5, lacks proper antecedent basis. Due to the language of the claims and its dependency on independent claim 1, “at least one vent” has been previously introduced. It appears both instances of the phrase “at least one vent” is intended to recite to the one vent. It appears “at least one vent” intended to recite “the at least one vent”.
The term “first low wind load area” in Claim 15, line 2 and 5 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “first low wind load area” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It appears the first low wind load area is intended to recite an area wherein the membrane is unsecured to the plurality of roof panels.
The term “the second high wind load area” in Claim 15, line 3 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “the second high wind load area” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It appears the second high wind load area is intended to recite an area wherein the membrane is mechanically or adhesively adhered to the plurality of roof panels.
The term “loose laid” in Claim 15, line 3 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “loose laid” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. It appears loose laid is intended to recite unsecured.
In regards to Claims 4-7, 11, 14 rejected due to dependency on independent claim 1 and pseudo-independent claim 13.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-2, 5, 8-11 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NG (US 20210180326 A1) in view of Gerber (US 4608792).
In regards to Claim 1, NG discloses
A roof system (20) [Figs 1-2] [Abstract, 0020-0021] comprising:
i. a roof framework (18) [Fig 3] [0019],
ii. a plurality of roof panels (22) [Fig 2] [0020],
iii. a roofing membrane (24) [Fig 2] covering at least a portion of an upper major surface [0024] of the roof panels (22) [Fig 2] [0020],
wherein each roof panel (22) [Fig 2] [0020] comprises an insulation layer (34) [Fig 3] [0022] arranged between inner (30) [Fig 2] and outer skins (32) [Fig 2].
However, NG fails to disclose
iv. at least one roof vent configured to equalize pressure beneath the roofing membrane,
Furthermore, Gerber discloses
at least one roof vent (7/8/9/10/11/12) [Fig 1-3] configured to equalize pressure [Col 2; Lines 8-15] [Claim 1 (e)] beneath the roofing membrane (24, NG) [Fig 2],
Based on the prior art relied upon above, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the roofing system by NG to further include at least one roof vent configured to equalize pressure beneath the roofing membrane as disclosed by Gerber. When modified, the vent allows air to become removed and suctioned out as disclosed by Gerber [See Abstract, “The wind driven suction devices increase the suction between the membrane and roof substrate in direct proportion to the velocity of the wind crossing the roof area.”]
In regards to Claim 2, NG as modified discloses
The roof system (20) [Figs 1-2] [Abstract, 0020-0021] according to claim 1, wherein each roof panel (22) [Fig 2] [0020] has longitudinal edges (28/29) [Fig 3] [Abstract] with a tongue and groove configuration (46/44/40) (42/44/50) [Fig 3] [0022] to enable mating [0022] of adjacent roof panels (22) [Fig 2] [0020] along their longitudinal edges (28/29) [Fig 3] [0022, “Thus, longitudinal edges 28 and 29 mate with one another as illustrated in FIGS. 3 and 4.”]
In regards to Claim 5, NG as modified discloses
The roof system (20) [Figs 1-2] [Abstract, 0020-0021] according to claim 1, wherein the roof panels (22) [Fig 2] [0020] are mechanically [Via (56), Fig 4] [0023, “A second set of fasteners 56 pass through the panels 22 to secure the panels with a truss 58 of the framework 18.”] and/or adhesively secured to a frame or truss (58) [Fig 3] [0024] forming the roof framework (18) [Fig 3] [0019].
In regards to Claim 8, NG as modified discloses
The roof system (20) [Figs 1-2] [Abstract, 0020-0021] according to claim 1 further comprising a first plurality of fasteners (54) [Fig 2] securing the adjacent roof panels (22) [Fig 2] [0020] together along the longitudinal edges (28/29) [Fig 3] [Abstract] and a second plurality of fasteners (56) [Fig 2] securing [Via (56), Fig 4] [0023, “A second set of fasteners 56 pass through the panels 22 to secure the panels with a truss 58 of the framework 18.”] the plurality of roof panels (22) [Fig 2] [0020] directly to and only to a frame or truss (58) [Fig 3] [0024] forming the roof framework (18) [Fig 3] [0019].
In regards to Claim 9, NG as modified discloses
The roof system (20) [Figs 1-2] [Abstract, 0020-0021] according to claim 8 further comprising a third plurality of fasteners (66) [Fig 4] securing the longitudinal edges (28/29) [Fig 3] [Abstract] of each of the plurality of the roof panels (22) [Fig 2] [0020] directly to and only to a frame or truss (58) [Fig 3] [0024] forming the roof framework (18) [Fig 3] [0019], the third plurality of fasteners (66) [Fig 4] being aligned with the second plurality of fasteners (56) [Fig 4] [0026, “The third plurality of fasteners 66 pass through the protection 48 and secure to the truss 58.”] [Claim 4 “wherein a third plurality of fasteners secure the longitudinal edge of each of the plurality of roof panels onto the frame or truss the third plurality of fasteners is aligned with the second plurality of fasteners.”]
In regards to Claim 10, NG as modified discloses
The roof system (20) [Figs 1-2] [Abstract, 0020-0021] according to claim 1
Gerber discloses
wherein each roof vent (7/8/9/10/11/12) [Fig 1-3] comprises at least one air conduit (7) [Fig 2] interposed [Col 2; Lines 5-7] between the upper major surface [Col 2; Lines 5-7] of the roof panels (2) [Fig 2] [Col 1; Lines 63-66] and the lower major surface [Col 2; Lines 5-7] [Claim 3] of the roofing membrane (24, NG) [Fig 2] for permitting flow of gas in a space [Col 2; Lines 6-8] between the plurality of roof panels (22, NG) [Fig 2] [0020] and the roofing membrane (24, NG) [Fig 2] and a suction mechanism (8) [Fig 2] operably connected to the air conduit (7) [Fig 2] for withdrawing air from the air conduit (7) [Fig 2] thereby reducing the pressure between the roofing membrane (24, NG) [Fig 2] and the plurality of roof panels (22, NG) [Fig 2] [0020] and creating a hold down force [Abstract/Claim 1 (e)] on the roofing membrane (24, NG) [Fig 2] [Col 2, Lines 5-16 “Air conduit means 7 is interposed between the substrate and the roof membrane for permitting the flow of gas in the space between the substrate and the roof membrane. A suction means 8 is mounted above the roof membrane and is operably connected to the air conduit means for withdrawing air from between the roof membrane and the roof substrate. The air is discharged to the atmosphere thereby creating suction between the substrate and the membrane.”] [Claim 1, (e)]
In regards to Claim 11, NG as modified discloses
The roof system (20) [Figs 1-2] [Abstract, 0020-0021] according to claim 10
Gerber discloses
wherein the suction mechanism (8) [Fig 1] is a wind driven rotatable turbine [Claim 5], a wind operated venturi [Claim 7], or a powered air moving device [Claim 8].
In regards to Claim 13, NG discloses
A method for providing a roof system (20) [Figs 1-5, showing a roof system provided] [Abstract, 0020-0021] according to claim 1 comprising steps of:
I) providing [Fig 3, Showing roof framework provided] a roof framework (18) [Fig 3] [0019],
II) installing [Fig 2, Showing a plurality of roof panels installed] a plurality of roof panels (22) [Fig 2] [0020] to the roof framework (18) [Fig 3] [0019],
III) covering [Fig 2, Showing the plurality of roof panels covered by the roofing membrane] the plurality roof panels (22) [Fig 2] [0020] with a roofing membrane (24) [Fig 2], and
wherein each roof panel (22) [Fig 2] [0020] comprises an insulation layer (34) [Fig 3] [0022] arranged between inner (30) [Fig 2] and outer skins (32) [Fig 1].
However, NG fails to disclose
installing at least one roof vent configured to equalize pressure beneath the roofing membrane,
Furthermore, Gerber discloses
IV) installing [Figs 1-3, showing one roof vent installed] at least one roof vent (7/8/9/10/11/12) [Fig 1-3] configured to equalize pressure [Col 2; Lines 8-15] beneath the roofing membrane (24, NG) [Fig 2],
Based on the prior art relied upon above, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the roofing system by NG to further include installing at least one roof vent configured to equalize pressure beneath the roofing membrane as disclosed by Gerber. When modified, the vent allows air to become removed and suctioned out as disclosed by Gerber [See Abstract, “The wind driven suction devices increase the suction between the membrane and roof substrate in direct proportion to the velocity of the wind crossing the roof area.”]
Claim 4 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NG (US20210180326 A1) in view of Gerber (US4608792) and Emblin (US4619100).
In regards to Claim 4, NG as modified discloses
The roof system (20) [Figs 1-2] [Abstract, 0020-0021] according claim 1, wherein the inner (30) [Fig 2] and outer skins (32) [Fig 2] of each roof panel (22) [Fig 2] [0020] are metal sheets [Emblin Col 1; Lines 55-58].
Based on the prior art relied upon above, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the roof system by NG to further include wherein the inner and outer skins of each roof panel are metal sheets as disclosed by Emblin. When modified, the inner and outer skins of the roof panel being metal sheets allows for an increase of longevity, strength and efficient comparatively to other materials.
Claim(s) 3, 6-7 and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NG (US20210180326 A1) in view of Gerber (US4608792) and Kennedy (US20180038109A1).
In regards to Claim 3, NG as modified discloses
The roof system (20) [Figs 1-2] [Abstract, 0020-0021] according to claim 1
wherein at least one of the longitudinal edges (28/29, NG) [Fig 3] of each roof panel (22, NG) [Fig 2] [0020] has at least one groove (46/44/40, NG) (42/44/50, NG) [Fig 3] [0022]
mated roof panels (22, NG) [Fig 2] [0020] .
However, fails to disclose
at least one groove comprising a sealant to ensure an air- and vapor-tight connection between mated roof panels.
Furthermore, Kennedy discloses
at least one groove (46/44/40, NG) (42/44/50, NG) [Fig 3] [0022] comprising a sealant (40) [0026] to ensure an air- and vapor-tight connection [0026 “joint fill material 40 provides an air/vapor barrier inherent in the modular panel 20 and system 10”] between mated roof panels (22, NG) [Fig 2] [0020] .
Based on the prior art relied upon above, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the roof system NG to further include wherein at least one of the longitudinal edges of each roof panel has at least one groove comprising a sealant to ensure an air- and vapor-tight connection between mated roof panels as disclosed by Kennedy. When modified, the sealant with all limitations allows for prevention of the ingress of moisture and gas and to efficiently insulate the roof as is the intended purpose [See 0026 Kennedy]
In regards to Claim 6, NG as modified discloses
The roof system (20) [Figs 1-2] [Abstract, 0020-0021] according to claim 1
the roof framework (18, NG) [Fig 3] [0019] and the plurality of roof panels (22, NG) [Fig 2] [0020].
However, fails to disclose
further comprising a vapor barrier arranged between the roof framework and the plurality of roof panels.
Furthermore, Kennedy discloses
further comprising a vapor barrier (40) [Fig 2] [0026] arranged between the roof framework (18, NG) [Fig 3] [0019] and the plurality of roof panels (22, NG) [Fig 2] [0020].
Based on the prior art relied upon above, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the roof system by NG to further include further comprising a vapor barrier arranged between the roof framework and the plurality of roof panels as disclosed by Kennedy. When modified, the vapor barrier with all limitations allows for reducing heat loss [As disclosed in Kennedy, Parag 0024] prevention of the ingress of moisture and gas and to efficiently insulate the roof as is the intended purpose [See 0026 Kennedy]
In regards to Claim 7, NG as modified discloses
The roof system (20) [Figs 1-2] [Abstract, 0020-0021] according to claim 1,
However, fails to disclose
wherein the insulation layer is a foam panel having a closed cell structure optionally selected from a molded expanded polystyrene (EPS) foam panel, an extruded expanded polystyrene (XPS) foam panel, a polyurethane foam panel (PUR) , or a polyisocyanurate (PIR) foam panel, optionally having a density of 10 - 150 g/l or 15 – 100 g/l.
Furthermore, Kennedy discloses
wherein the insulation layer (34, NG) [Fig 3] [0022] is a foam panel having a closed cell structure [0049 “Expanded Polystyrene (EPS) closed-cell foam”] optionally selected from a molded expanded polystyrene (EPS) foam panel [0049], an extruded expanded polystyrene (XPS) foam panel, a polyurethane foam panel (PUR) , or a polyisocyanurate (PIR) foam panel, optionally having a density of 10 - 150 g/l or 15 – 100 g/l.
Based on the prior art relied upon above, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the roof system by NG to further include wherein the insulation layer (34) [Fig 3] [0022] is a foam panel having a closed cell structure [0049 “Expanded Polystyrene (EPS) closed-cell foam”, Kennedy] optionally selected from a molded expanded polystyrene (EPS) foam panel [0049, Kennedy], an extruded expanded polystyrene (XPS) foam panel, a polyurethane foam panel (PUR) , or a polyisocyanurate (PIR) foam panel, optionally having a density of 10 - 150 g/l or 15 – 100 g/l as disclosed by Kennedy. When modified, the foam panel with all limitations allows for semi-rigid insulation offering moisture impermeability and increased structural strength as is the intended purpose of a foam panel comprising a closed cell structure.
Additionally, the language “optionally selected” is language that suggests or makes optional the subsequent limitation or limitations. Language that suggests or makes optional but does not require steps to be performed or does not limit a claim to a particular structure does not limit the scope of a claim or claim limitation. See § MPEP 2103 (C).
In regards to Claim 14, NG as modified discloses
The method [Figs 1-5, showing a roof system provided] according to claim 13,
However, fails to disclose
wherein the method comprises a further step of installing a vapor barrier to the roof framework before conducing step II) of the method.
Furthermore, Kennedy discloses
a further step of installing [Fig 2, Showing Installed] a vapor barrier (40, Kennedy) [Fig 2] [0026] to the roof framework (18) [Fig 3] [0019]
Based on the prior art relied upon above, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the roof system by NG to further include further comprising a vapor barrier arranged between the roof framework and the plurality of roof panels as disclosed by Kennedy. When modified, the vapor barrier with all limitations allows for reducing heat loss [As disclosed in Kennedy, Parag 0024] prevention of the ingress of moisture and gas and to efficiently insulate the roof as is the intended purpose [See 0026 Kennedy]
However, it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the method of NG with installing the vapor barrier to the roof framework before conducting step II) of the method in order to facilitate prevention of ingress of moisture and gas. When modified, the vapor barrier would be installed under the roof panels before installation, facilitating ease of installation in the field. In general, selection of the order of performing process steps has been held as within the level of ordinary skill in the art absent new or unexpected results. In re Gibson, 39 F.2d 975.
Claim 12 and 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over NG (US20210180326 A1) in view of Gerber (US4608792) and Kelly (US4223486).
In regards to Claim 12, NG as modified discloses
The roof system (20) [Figs 1-2] [Abstract, 0020-0021] according to claim 1, wherein the roof system (20) [Figs 1-2] [Abstract, 0020-0021] comprises a second high wind load area [As Interpreted below, wherein the membrane is mechanically or adhesively secured] where the roofing membrane (24) [Fig 2] is mechanically or adhesively adhered [Claims 6-7] to the plurality of roof panels (22) [Fig 2] [0020]
However, fails to disclose
a first low wind load area where the roofing membrane is loose laid over the plurality of roof panels
Furthermore, Kelly discloses
a first low wind load area [As interpreted below, wherein the membrane is loose laid and not mechanically/adhesively secured] where the roofing membrane (24) [Fig 2] is loose laid [Abstract, Kelly] over the plurality of roof panels (22) [Fig 2] [0020]
wherein the roof vent(s) (7/8/9/10/11/12, NG) [Fig 1-3] is/are installed only in the first low wind area [As interpreted above and below, wherein the membrane is loose laid (unsecured to the roof panels) and not mechanically/adhesively secured]
Based on the prior art relied upon above, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the roof system by NG to further include wherein the roof system comprises a first low wind load area where the roofing membrane is loose laid over the plurality of roof panels and wherein the roof vent(s) is/are installed only in the first low wind area as disclosed by Kelly. When modified, the loose laid areas, allow for an increase of wind and pressure to go underneath the membrane whereas the bolted/fastened areas do not allow for this. Additionally, when modified the installing the vents at the loose laid membrane areas allows for equalizing the air pressure as intended. See Kelly [Abstract, “A roof structure provided with one or more oneway or duckbill valves placed 3 feet in from the perimeter and on every outside corner at 50 foot intervals, which at their bases open into the area between a loosely laid membrane and the roof insulation in order to equalize the positive air pressure between the loosely laid membrane and the insulation with the minus air pressure which occurs on the top of the roof when wind blows across the roof.”]
Examiners Interpretation: The first low wind load area corresponds with the loose laid area. Whereas the second high wind load area corresponds with mechanically or adhesively adhered area. Kelly as used in the above rejection discloses only the loose laid area and NG as used in the above discloses the second high wind load area.
In regards to Claim 15, NG as modified discloses
The method [Figs 1-5, showing a roof system provided] according to Claim 13, wherein the roof system (20) [Figs 1-2] [Abstract, 0020-0021] comprises a second high wind load area [As Interpreted below, wherein the membrane is mechanically or adhesively secured] where the roofing membrane (24) [Fig 2] is mechanically or adhesively adhered [Claims 6-7] to the plurality of roof panels (22) [Fig 2] [0020]
However, fails to disclose
a first low wind load area where the roofing membrane is loose laid over the plurality of roof panels
Furthermore, Kelly discloses
a first low wind load area [As interpreted below, wherein the membrane is loose laid and not mechanically/adhesively secured] where the roofing membrane (24) [Fig 2] is loose laid [Abstract, Kelly] over the plurality of roof panels (22) [Fig 2] [0020]
wherein the roof vent(s) (7/8/9/10/11/12, NG) [Fig 1-3] is/are installed only in the first low wind area [As interpreted above and below, wherein the membrane is loose laid and not mechanically/adhesively secured]
Based on the prior art relied upon above, it would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the roof system by NG to further include wherein the roof system comprises a first low wind load area where the roofing membrane is loose laid over the plurality of roof panels and wherein the roof vent(s) is/are installed only in the first low wind area as disclosed by Kelly. When modified, the loose laid areas, allow for an increase of wind and pressure to go underneath the membrane whereas the bolted/fastened areas do not allow for this. Additionally, when modified the installing the vents at the loose laid membrane areas allows for equalizing the air pressure as intended. See Kelly [Abstract, “A roof structure provided with one or more oneway or duckbill valves placed 3 feet in from the perimeter and on every outside corner at 50 foot intervals, which at their bases open into the area between a loosely laid membrane and the roof insulation in order to equalize the positive air pressure between the loosely laid membrane and the insulation with the minus air pressure which occurs on the top of the roof when wind blows across the roof.”]
Examiners Interpretation: The first low wind load area corresponds with the loose laid area. Whereas the second high wind load area corresponds with mechanically or adhesively adhered area. Kelly as used in the above rejection discloses only the loose laid area and NG as used in the above discloses the second high wind load area.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant’s disclosure. See PTO 892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ZAKARIA K. AL-ASWAR whose telephone number is (571)272-6335. The examiner can normally be reached M through F 7:30 to 5PM.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Brian Mattei can be reached at 571-270-3238. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Z.K.A./Examiner, Art Unit 3635
/KYLE J. WALRAED-SULLIVAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3635
